Nuclear Energy

[IQ]

Nuclear Facts


Operating Plants
Currently, there are 103 commercial nuclear power plants producing electricity in the United States, located at 65 sites in 31 states. They are, on average, 24 years old, and are licensed to operate for 40 years with an option to renew for an additional 20.
Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station in Arizona generates more electricity annually than any other U.S. power plant of any kind, including coal, oil, natural gas and hydro. The three-unit, 3,875-megawatt nuclear plant generated 25,807,446 megawatt-hours of electricity in 2005. Palo Verde generated more electricity than all of the wind and solar plants in the U.S. combined in 2005.
As of January 2007, 30 countries worldwide were operating 435 nuclear plants for electricity generation. Thirty new nuclear plants were under construction in 12 countries.
In December 1951, an experimental reactor produced the first electric power from the atom, lighting four light bulbs. Nuclear energy has been used since 1953 to power U.S. navy vessels, and since 1955 to provide electricity for home use.
Electricity Production

In 2005, U.S. nuclear plants generated 782 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity. In 2004, they produced 788 billion kilowatt-hours.
Vermont, in 2005, generated the greatest percentage of its electricity from nuclear energy of any state: 72 percent. New Jersey and South Carolina generated more than half of their electricity from nuclear energy in 2005.
Nuclear power plants provided some 16 percent of the world's electricity production in 2005. Countries generating the largest percentage of their electricity in 2005 from nuclear energy were: France, 78.5 percent; Lithuania, 69.6 percent; Slovakia, 56.1 percent; Belgium 55.6 percent; Ukraine, 48.5 percent; Sweden, 46.7 percent; Republic of Korea, 44.7 percent; Bulgaria, 44.1 percent; Slovenia, 42.4 percent; Hungary, 37.2 percent; and Finland, 32.9 percent. In total, 16 countries relied on nuclear energy to supply at least one-quarter of their total electricity.

Economic Performance
The average electricity production cost in 2005 for nuclear energy was 1.72 cents per kilowatt-hour, for coal-fired plants 2.21 cents / kWh, for oil 8.09 cents / kWh, and for natural gas 7.51 cents / kWh.
Nuclear power plants provide low-cost, predictable power at stable prices and are essential in maintaining the reliability of the U.S. electric power system.


To produce one Watt of electricity, it takes 1.0 lbs. of coal/kWh from coal plants using steam turbines, 0.48 lbs. of natural gas from natural gas using steam turbines, 0.37 lbs. of natural gas/kWh using combined cycle technology, 0.58 lbs. of Heavy Oil/kWh using steam turbines, and .0000008 lbs. of Uranium enriched at 4% U235 and 96% U238 for use in a commercial nuclear reactor.

A 100 watt light bulb that ran continuously for an entire year would consume 876 kWh. Producing the necessary electricity would require 876 lbs. of coal, 377-324 lbs. of natural gas, 508 lbs. of oil, or 0.0007 lbs. of Uranium enriched to 4% for use in a commercial nuclear reactor.

Environmental Protection
Of all energy sources, nuclear energy has perhaps the lowest impact on the environment, including water, land, habitat, species and air resources. Nuclear energy is the most eco-efficient of all energy sources because it produces the most electricity in relation to its minimal environmental impact.
Nuclear energy is the world's largest source of emission-free energy. Nuclear power plants produce no controlled air pollutants, such as sulfur and particulates, or greenhouse gases. The use of nuclear energy in place of other energy sources helps to keep the air clean, preserve the Earth's climate, avoid ground-level ozone formation and prevent acid rain.

The NOx emissions avoided by U.S. nuclear power plants are equivalent to the NOx emissions from approximately 55 million passenger cars (41 percent of the U.S. total). The carbon dioxide emissions avoided by U.S. nuclear power plants are equivalent to the carbon dioxide emissions from approximately 131 million passenger cars (96 percent of the U.S. total).

Nuclear power plants were responsible for more than a third of the total voluntary reductions in greenhouse gas emissions reported by U.S. companies in 2005 (the last year available), according to the Energy Information Administration. Emissions reductions from nuclear energy usage amounted to 138 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, 36 percent of the 384 million metric tons of total carbon dioxide equivalent reductions reported.


Throughout the nuclear fuel cycle, the small volume of waste by-products actually created is carefully contained, packaged and safely stored. As a result, the nuclear energy industry is the only industry established since the industrial revolution that has managed and accounted for all of its waste, preventing adverse impacts to the environment.
Water discharged from a nuclear power plant contains no harmful pollutants and meets regulatory standards for temperature designed to protect aquatic life.

[IQ]

Industrial Safety

For years, America's commercial nuclear energy industry has ranked among the safest places to work in the United States. In 2005, nuclear's industrial safety accident rate--which tracks the number of accidents that result in lost work time, restricted work or fatalities--was 0.22 per 200,000 worker-hours. U.S. Bureau of Labor statistics show that it is safer to work at a nuclear power plant than in the manufacturing sector and even in the real estate and finance industries.

Even if you lived right next door to a nuclear power plant, you would still receive less radiation each year than you would receive in just one round-trip flight from New York to Los Angeles.

You would have to live near a nuclear power plant for over 2,000 years to get the same amount of radiation exposure that you get from a single diagnostic medical x-ray.

Weapons Disposal

Since March 1993, 250 metric tons of uranium from weapons have been transformed into fuel for nuclear power plants. That's the equivalent of 10,000 dismantled nuclear weapons. This is the result of the United States and the Russian Federation signing an agreement on the disposition and purchase of 500 metric tons of highly enriched uranium from dismantled Russian nuclear weapons, the equivalent of 20,000 nuclear warheads.

License Renewal

License renewal is expected for virtually all U.S. nuclear power plants. To date, the owners of over two-thirds of the nation’s 104 nuclear power plants have either renewed their licenses (48 reactors), filed with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for license renewal (8 reactors), or officially informed the NRC that they expect to apply for license renewal over the next six years (26 plants). More are anticipated to follow. Baltimore Gas and Electric (now Constellation Energy) became the first company to seek license renewal in April 1998 when it applied to the NRC for a 20-year extension of its two-unit Calvert Cliffs plant and was the first to receive a renewed license in March 2000. In July 1998, Duke Power's three-unit Oconee Nuclear Station in South Carolina applied for license renewal, and was granted a license renewal in May 2000.

Plant Purchases

AmerGen Energy Co.—a joint venture between Philadelphia-based PECO Energy and British Energy—became the first company to acquire an operating nuclear power plant in the United States in July 1998, when it agreed to purchase Three Mile Island 1 from GPU Inc. In November 1998, Entergy Nuclear became the first company to win a competitive bidding process for an operating U.S. nuclear plant, when it submitted the winning offer for Boston Edison's Pilgrim plant. Entergy Nuclear became the first company to close a nuclear power plant sale in the United States—Pilgrim Station in July 1999. AmerGen, Entergy and others are pursuing additional plant purchases as well.

Plant Records

Capacity factor: According to the Energy Information Adminstration, in 2002, U.S. plants set an industry record in capacity factor (the measure of a plant's actual electrical output vs. its potential output): 90.3 percent for all 104 units.

Longest continuous run by a U.S. light water reactor: LaSalle 1 completed a 739 day run on February 20th, 2006. Ontario Hydro's Pickering 7—a heavy water, CANDU design—holds the record for the longest run by any type of reactor: 894 days, completed in 1994. (CANDU plants can continue to operate during refueling; light water reactors cannot.)

Shortest refueling outage by a U.S. nuclear plant: Browns Ferry Unit 3, a boiling water reactor, completed a 14-day, 16-hour outage in March-April 2002. Braidwood Unit 2 holds the U.S. record for pressurized water reactors: 15 days, 14 hours, 57 minutes, set in November 2003. The median refueling outage for all U.S. plants in 2006 was 37 days.

Medical Diagnosis and Treatment

The largest man-made source of radiation is medical diagnosis and treatment, including X-rays, nuclear medicine and cancer treatment.

More than 28,000 American doctors practice medical specialties that use radiation.

The use of radiation for medical diagnosis and treatment is so widespread that virtually every U.S. hospital has some form of nuclear medicine unit.

Nearly 4,000 hospital-based nuclear medicine departments across the country perform more than 10 million nuclear medicine patient procedures each year.

One radioactive isotope developed at the Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York, molybdenum-99, is used about 40,000 times each day in the United States to diagnose cancer and other illnesses.

Of the 10 Nobel prizes granted in physiology and medicine from 1975 to 1989, 10 were based on research using radioactive materials.

Food Processing and Preservation

Irradiation kills bacteria, parasites and insects in food—including listeria, salmonella and potentially deadly E. coli—and retards non-microbial spoilage of certain foods, increasing their shelf life. In the United States alone, according to the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, more than 6.5 million serious cases of food-related illness occur each year, causing more than 10,000 deaths.

The World Health Organization in 1992 called food irradiation a "perfectly sound food-preservation technology." The head of the group's food safety unit said irradiation is "badly needed in a world where food-borne diseases are on the increase and where between one-quarter and one-third of the global food supply is lost post-harvest."

The United States is among more than 35 countries that permit irradiation of certain foods.

Since the 1960s, NASA has included irradiated food on its space flights.

In 1963, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the irradiation of wheat, flour and potatoes; in 1983, spices and seasonings; in 1985, pork; in 1986, fruits and vegetables; in 1990, poultry; and in 1997, red meat.

Industrial Applications

Radiation is used to sterilize baby powder, bandages, contact lens solution and many cosmetics, including false eyelashes and mascara.

Small amounts of a radioactive substance are commonly used as tracers in process materials. They make it possible to track leakage from piping systems, monitor the rate of engine wear and corrosion of processing equipment, observe the velocity of materials through pipes, and gauge system filtration efficiency.

The automobile industry uses radioactive materials to test the quality of steel in cars. Aircraft manufacturers use radiation to check for flaws in jet engines. Can manufacturers use radioactive materials to obtain the proper thickness of tin and aluminum.

Mining and petroleum companies use radionuclides to locate and quantify mineral deposits. Oil, gas and mining companies use them to map geological contours, using test wells and mine boresand to determine the presence of hydrocarbons.

Pipeline companies use radioactive materials to look for defects in welds. Construction crews use radioactive materials to gauge the density of road surfaces and subsurfaces.

Fuel Availability

Uranium is a relatively abundant element that occurs naturally in the earth's crust. Uranium oxide is more abundant than gold and silver, and about as common as tin.

In 2002, 16 countries produced over 99 percent of the world's total uranium production. Canada's and Australia's uranium mines account for over 50 percent.

[IQ]

Benefits of Nuclear Energy

Nuclear energy preserves the environment. Nuclear energy has perhaps the lowest impact on the environment—including air, land, water, and wildlife—of any energy source, because it does not emit harmful gases, isolates its waste from the environment, and requires less area to produce the same amount of electricity as other sources.

Nuclear energy provides reliable electricity. Nuclear energy is a dependable provider of electricity for the United States and the world, in part because of the large size of the plants, their long periods of operation, and the expertise with which they are run.

Nuclear energy is an economical energy source. Nuclear energy is efficient and cost-effective because of stable fuel prices, high plant performance, modernized plants, and renewal of plant licenses.

Nuclear energy contributes to energy security, essential for national security. As an integral part of the diverse U.S. energy mix, nuclear energy is a secure energy source that the nation can depend on. Unlike some other energy sources, nuclear energy is not subject to unreliable weather or climate conditions, unpredictable cost fluctuations, or dependence on foreign suppliers. In fact, nuclear energy is a strong domestic as well as international industry, with extensive fuel supply sources.

[IQ]

Nuclear Energy and the Electric Power Plant

Common power plant structure. Power plants that generate electricity from nuclear energy are similar in structure to plants that use fossil fuels—coal, oil, natural gas—as an energy source. At all power plants, except hydroelectric plants, high-pressure steam "blows" the propeller-like blades of a turbine, which spins the shaft of a huge generator. Inside the generator, a coil of wire spins in a magnetic field to create electricity.

Different processes to produce heat. The heat needed to boil water into steam in a power plant is produced either by burning coal, oil, or natural gas in a furnace, a chemical process, or by splitting atoms of uranium in a nuclear reactor, a physical process.

Nuclear fission does not involve burning or explosions. Nothing is burned or exploded in a nuclear power plant. Rather, the uranium fuel—tons of it—generates heat through a process called fission. These plants do not produce electricity through nuclear explosions and the electricity is not radioactive. In fact, the nuclear fuel in a commercial nuclear power plant cannot explode.

The fission process inside a nuclear plant. The uranium used as fuel in a nuclear plant is formed into ceramic pellets about the size of the end of your little finger. These pellets are inserted into long, vertical tubes within the reactor core. As uranium atoms in these pellets are struck by atomic particles, they split—or fission—to release particles of their own. These particles—called neutrons—strike other uranium atoms, splitting them. This sequence of one fission triggering others, and those triggering still more, is called a chain reaction. When the atoms split, they also release heat. This heat is known as nuclear energy.

Controlling the fission process in a nuclear plant. The nuclear reaction inside the reactor is controlled by rods inserted among the tubes holding the uranium fuel. These control rods are made of a material that absorbs neutrons and prevents them from hitting atoms that can fission. In this way, the nuclear reaction can be speeded up or slowed down by varying the number of control rods withdrawn and how much they are withdrawn.

[IQ]

Types of Nuclear Power Plants

Two types of U.S. nuclear plants operate on the same principles. Commercial nuclear power plants in the United States are either boiling water reactors or pressurized water reactors. Both are cooled by ordinary water. The coolant—the water—is the main link in the process that converts fission energy to electrical energy.

Boiling water reactors. In boiling water reactors, the water is heated by the nuclear fuel and boils to steam directly in the reactor vessel. It is then piped directly to the turbine. The turbine spins, driving the electric generator, producing electricity. Boiling water reactors are manufactured by General Electric.

Pressurized water reactors. In pressurized water reactors, the water is heated by the nuclear fuel but kept under pressure to prevent it from boiling. Instead, the hot water is pumped from the reactor pressure vessel to a steam generator. There the heat of the water is transferred to a second, separate supply of water, which boils to make steam. The steam spins the turbine, driving the electric generator, producing electricity. Pressurized water reactors are manufactured by Babcock and Wilcox Company; Westinghouse Electric Corporation; and the former Combustion Engineering, Inc., now a part of Westinghouse.

[IQ]

The Uranium Fuel Used in a Nuclear Plant

Same fuel used in boiling water and pressurized water reactors . Both U.S.nuclear reactor types use essentially the same fuel—a solid material containing two kinds, or isotopes, of uranium atoms. One isotope—U-235—makes up less than one percent of natural uranium but fissions readily. The other isotope—U-238—makes up most of natural uranium but is practically non-fissionable.

Enrichment increases the fuel’s power but far too little to explode. Through a process know as "enrichment," the concentration of U-235 in the uranium is increased to three to five percent. Among other benefits, enrichment enables the reactor to be smaller than it would have to be if fueled with natural uranium. The concentration of U-235 is so low in enriched power-plant uranium that a nuclear explosion is impossible.

Nuclear fuel changes as it is used. Certain changes take place in the ceramic fuel pellets during their time in the reactor of the nuclear power plant. In addition to causing the fissioning of the U-235 fuel, some neutrons strike the U-238 atoms and turn them into plutonium, another fissionable element. Some of the plutonium itself undergoes fission, adding to the production of heat in the reactor.

Replacing fuel in a nuclear reactor. Most of the fragments of fission—the particles left over after the atom has split—are radioactive. During the life of the fuel, these radioactive fragments collect within the fuel pellets. The fuel remains in the reactor for three to four years before most of the U-235 is fissioned and trapped fission fragments begin to reduce the efficiency of the chain reaction. Between one-fourth and one-third of the fuel rods are replaced every 12-18 months.

Storing used nuclear fuel. The fuel removed from a U.S. power plant reactor—sometimes referred to as "nuclear waste" or "high-level waste"—is stored under water at the nuclear plant site in large concrete vaults lined with stainless steel and in above-ground dry storage facilities in steel and lead containers placed inside concrete vaults. Eventually, this used fuel will be transported to a centralized storage facility under the national used nuclear fuel management program run by the U.S. Department of Energy.

[IQ]

Natural Safety Features in a Nuclear Plant

Ceramic pellets resist temperature and corrosion. The uranium fuel is formed into ceramic pellets, which resist the effects of high temperature and corrosion during operation.

Fuel pellets are only partially fissionable. The concentration of fissionable U-235 in fuel pellets is very low. Because the U-235 is diluted with other, non-fissionable U-238, materials, the chain reaction tends to slow down as it gets hotter.

The metal of fuel pellet tubes resists radiation. Fuel pellets are stacked end-to-end in 12-foot long tubes made of a special metal—zirconium alloy—which resists heat, radiation, and corrosion.

Control rods manage the reaction. The fuel pellet tubes are precisely arranged as assemblies within the reactor, with spaces between them for the control rods. Control rods—made of a material that absorbs neutrons and prevents fission—can speed up or slow down the nuclear reaction. In a boiling water reactor, the control rods go between the fuel assemblies. In a pressurized water reactor, the control rods are mixed in the assemblies with the fuel rods.

Water removes heat and can slow the reaction. Water flowing up through the assemblies removes the heat of the chain reaction. Water also serves as a "moderator." It slows down the neutrons and increases the probability of fission. Rather than hitting the nucleus, the neutron must combine with it momentarily. If the neutrons are moving too quickly, fission is unlikely to occur. This "moderating" effect of the water adds another safety feature. Any loss of water—from overheating and boiling into steam or from a leak—slows the chain reaction. In a boiling water reactor, as the water boils, voids in the water are created, reducing the moderating effect. As the water gets hotter, more moderation is lost and the reaction automatically begins to slow down.

[IQ]

Built-in Safety Systems in a Nuclear Plant

Multiple redundant safety systems. Nuclear plants are designed according to a "defense in depth" philosophy that requires redundant, diverse, reliable safety systems. Two or more safety systems perform key functions independently, such that, if one fails, there is always another to back it up, providing continuous protection.

Highly reliable automated safety systems. A nuclear plant has many built-in sensors to watch temperature, pressure, water level, and other indicators important to safety. The sensors are connected to control and protection systems that adjust or shut down the plant, immediately and automatically, when pre-set safety limits are approached or crossed.

Physical barriers safely contain radiation and provide emergency protection. The fuel rod assemblies are contained within a large, thick steel reactor vessel. In turn, the reactor vessel and extensive safety and steam generation equipment are enclosed in a massive, reinforced steel and concrete structure, the "containment," whose walls are three to four feet thick.

[IQ]

Nuclear Energy Vital to the New Economy

Growing electricity demand from the digital economy outpacing supply. A combination of market, performance, and economic conditions requires that new power plants be built to meet growing electricity demand in the United States. This country's digitally driven economy is expected to increase electricity demand by 30 to 35 percent by 2010. Today, computer and high-tech peripherals are estimated to account for 13 percent of all electricity usage. By 2020, they are expected to account for 25 percent. Silicon Valley's power usage has grown about 5 percent a year—fully by one-third since 1994—triple California's statewide rate. If a typical home requires one, and a commercial office building five, watts per square foot, a chip manufacturing plant requires 30 to 50, and a server farm 75 to 100. The U.S. Department of Energy, in its energy outlook for 2007, forecasts growth in demand for electricity of 1.4 percent annually through 2030. To satisfy that demand, DOE predicts the United States must increase electricity production by 40 percent—the equivalent of adding about 300 new 1,000-megawatt power plants.

Nuclear energy is environmentally friendly to preserve the earth's future. Nuclear energy is an advanced technology that protects the environment. Nuclear energy is the most productive source of electricity that does not produce greenhouse gases or such air pollutants as nitrogen oxides or sulfur dioxide that could threaten our atmosphere by causing ground-level ozone formation, smog, and acid rain. Also, nuclear power plants occupy a small space in relation to the vast amount of electricity they generate. They help preserve our green land, compared with other renewable energy sources, like solar or wind, which use many more acres. To build the equivalent of a 1,000-megawatt nuclear plant, a solar park would have to be larger than 35,000 acres, and a wind farm would have to be 150,000 acres or larger. By contrast, the Millstone Units 2 and 3 nuclear power plants in Connecticut have an installed capacity of over 1,900 megawatts of power on a 500-acre site designed for three nuclear plants.

Environmental regulations require emission-free power. Clean air standards and emissions regulations—both national and international—are becoming increasingly stringent. From a domestic standpoint, nuclear power plants play a significant role in clean air compliance because they are the largest emission-free source of electricity in the United States. Today, 19 percent of the nation's electricity is produced by nuclear energy. A state or region can more easily remain within its emission limitations and still meet its electricity needs when emission-free energy sources are used as much as possible. States would have more difficulty meeting both electricity and clean air requirements if they did not have nuclear power plants. In order to achieve further reductions in air pollutants, we must continue to produce one-fifth of our electricity from nuclear energy. This is why building new plants is so important. From an international perspective, under the Kyoto Protocol, the agreement reached at the United Nations Convention on Global Climate Change, the United States had once committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 7 percent below 1990 levels, the equivalent of closing 150 1,000-megawatt fossil fuel burning plants.

Energy diversity ensures energy security, essential to national security. Energy security depends upon a diverse mix of energy sources that balances cost, availability, and environmental impact. As an integral part of the diverse U.S. energy mix, nuclear energy is a secure energy source that the nation can depend on. Unlike some other energy sources, nuclear energy is not subject to unreliable weather or climate conditions, unpredictable cost fluctuations, or dependence on foreign suppliers. In fact, nuclear energy is a strong domestic as well as international industry, with extensive fuel supply sources.

Affordable electricity for a digital economy. Nuclear energy provides reliable, low-cost electricity to satisfy the increasing electricity demands of a digital economy. The average electricity production cost in 2005 for nuclear energy was 1.72 cents per kilowatt-hour, for coal-fired plants 2.21 cents / kWh, for oil 8.09 cents / kWh, and for natural gas 7.51 cents / kWh. In addition, nuclear energy is not affected by the price volatility experienced by other major energy sources, like oil and natural gas. For instance, during the 18-month period from January 1999 to July 2000, the average price electric utilities paid for natural gas increased by 88 percent. By contrast, during the 10-year period from 1990 to 1999, the highest yearly increase in nuclear fuel costs was 6 percent, in 1996. Significantly, during this decade, nuclear fuel costs actually decreased by 46 percent.

A global market for a small planet. Nuclear energy is a global power source, essential to both developed and developing countries alike. U.S.-based architectural/engineering companies often undertake new plant construction around the world and provide various kinds of support. Many countries depend on nuclear energy for much of their electricity generation—in 2005, for instance, 16 countries relied on nuclear energy to supply at least one-quarter of their total electricity. Worldwide, 30 countries are operating 435 nuclear plants for electricity generation. In 12 countries, 30 new nuclear plants are under construction. Fuel fabrication and enrichment is a robust international industry. Sixty percent of the fuel fabrication capacity is overseas and vendors outside of the United States meet two-thirds of the world' s uranium fuel enrichment needs.

Competitive for the new competition. Information technology has introduced a new level of competition to business in the new millenium, and competition has come to the energy business in a very direct way. More and more state governments are allowing competition in the electric power industry. Most nuclear power plants are thriving in this competitive environment, because they operate so cost-effectively. For instance as mentioned above, the average electricity production cost in 2005 for nuclear energy was 1.72 cents per kilowatt-hour, for coal-fired plants 2.21 cents / kWh, for oil 8.09 cents / kWh, and for natural gas 7.51 cents / kWh.

Regulation focused on safety. Nuclear power plant resources are now being used even more efficiently for safety and productivity, making nuclear plants even more competitive. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission—with contributions from the nuclear industry—has developed a new, more objective way to measure and monitor the safety performance of operating nuclear plants. Recently implemented, the new reactor oversight process focuses more on matters that really affect safety. In addition, the industry is working with the NRC to revise nuclear plant regulations to be more safety-focused as well.

[IQ]

Industry Progress Toward Building New Nuclear Plants

The schedule of major regulatory requirements for new plant construction in the United States. There are three major requirements established by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to build a nuclear plant.

● The early site permit gives a company approval for a plant site before a decision is actually made to build the plant. The energy company makes the application and the approval process takes approximately two and a half years.

● The design certification of a reactor design signifies the NRC’s approval that the design meets regulatory safety standards. The reactor manufacturer makes the application. Once the decision to seek certification has been made, the regulatory interactions leading to approval take between five and eight years.

● The combined construction and operating license (COL) permits the construction and subsequent operation of a specific nuclear reactor design at a specific site. Energy companies and reactor manufacturers may apply for a COL. The approval process for the first COL could take up to three years, while subsequent approval of COLs for identical plants will take about one and a half years.



Probable timetable for building new nuclear plants in this country. The early site permit and the design certification processes can take place independently. Three energy companies applied for early site permits in 2003 and the NRC has already certified several advanced design nuclear reactors, while other safety certifications are pending. Three consortia comprised of energy companies, reactor manufacturers, and architectural/engineering firms formed in 2004 to test the construction and operating license process, with a potential application submittal in the 2008 timeframe. Once the NRC has issued the COL, construction can then begin, and completion schedules range from four to five years.



U.S. energy companies apply for early site permits. In 2003, Exelon, Entergy and Dominion filed for early site permits for new reactors—Dominion at its North Anna power station in Virginia, Exelon at Clinton Station in Illinois, and, Entergy at Grand Gulf Station in Mississippi. Under the early site permit program, an energy company may "bank" an approved site for future use, returning to the NRC at a later date to request a construction and operating license for a pre-approved plant design.



Industry consortia form to test the construction and operating license process. Three consortia responded in 2004 to the U.S. Department of Energy’s solicitation under the Nuclear Power 2010 initiative and were awarded matching funds. Two will test the construction and operating license process and one will explore construction feasibility.
● The Dominion-led consortium includes GE Energy, Hitachi America, and Bechtel Corp., and has selected General Electric's Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) [GE joined the consortium in 2005; originally, AECL Technology was the reactor vendor and Atomic Energy of Canada’s ACR 700 reactor the technology of choice]. In 2005, the consortium selected Dominion's North Anna nuclear plant site for the COL application, scheduled to be submitted in 2007.
● The NuStart Energy LLC consortium consists of Constellation Generation Group, Duke Energy, EDF International North America, Entergy Nuclear, Exelon Generation, Florida Power & Light Co., Progress Energy, Southern Co., GE Energy, TVA, and Westinghouse Electric Co., and has chosen the General Electric Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) and the Westinghouse Advanced Passive 1000 reactor. In 2005, the consortium chose TVA's Bellefonte nuclear plant site and Entergy's Grand Gulf site for COL applications, expected to be submitted in 2007.
● The third consortium, led by TVA, includes General Electric, Toshiba, USEC Inc., Global Fuel-Americas, and Bechtel Power Corp., formed todevelop a feasibility study for a TVA site based on the General Electric Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR). The study was completed in 2005. See the summary and the full report.


Energy companies plan to submit construction and operating license applications. Subsequent to the consortia activity, individual energy companies also began work on additional COLs, all in 2005.
● Entergy plans to submit a COL for its River Bend nuclear plant site for an ESBWR in 2008.
● Southern Company plans to submit a COL for its Vogtle plant site in 2008.
● Progress Energy plans to submit two COL applications in 2008, one for its Harris Nuclear Plant site in North Carolina and one for a site to be selected in Florida.
● Duke will prepare a COL application for two AP1000 reactors at sites still to be determined.
● Constellation Energy formed a nuclear plant and construction joint venture with AREVA—called UniStar—and plans to submit an ESP in 2007 for the Calvert Cliffs or Nine Mile Point sites and a COL application for the EPR reactor in 2008, with design certification for the EPR proceeding at the same time and to be submitted in 2007.

● South Carolina Electric & Gas is conducting preliminary work and evaluation on a possible COL.

NRC design certification has been awarded to four advanced reactor designs, and others are in the evaluation process. The General Electric ABWR, the Westinghouse AP600, the Westinghouse System 80+ reactor, and, in January 2006, the Westinghouse AP1000 have received design safety certification from the NRC. The General Electric ESBWR design is being evaluated by the NRC. Reactors preparing for certification are the Atomic Energy of Canada’s ACR 1000, AREVA’s EPR, and General Atomic’s Modularized Helium Reactor (GT-MHR). Reactors expected to apply to the NRC for design certification some time in the future are ESKOM’s Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR), AREVA’s High Temperature Gas (HTG) reactor ANTARES, and the Westinghouse IRIS (International Reactor Innovative and Secure), a pressurized water reactor (PWR).



Vision 2020 goal is 50,000 additional megawatts of nuclear power capacity by 2020. In 2001, the nuclear energy industry announced its goal to preserve the same percentage of America’s emission-free electricity while at the same time adding new electricity generation. Vision 2020 specifies having enough new nuclear power plants either under order, in construction, or built to provide 50,000 MW of additional electricity generating capacity to the U.S. power grid by 2020. In addition, Vision 2020 calls for the addition of another 10,000 MW capacity of nuclear power by (1) uprating existing plants, that is modifying these plants with more efficient equipment and more accurate instrumentation so that they can produce more electricity, and (2) operating current plants more efficiently so that there is less time when the reactor is not producing full power. These two changes will result in increasing the share of nuclear energy in the nation's electric supply from 20 percent to 23 percent. Together with other renewable production, these increases will maintain the non-emitting percentage of electricity produced in the United States at 30 percent, continuing to help keep our air clean.



NEI convenes task force to prepare for building new nuclear power plants. In late 2000, energy companies began to talk publicly about exploring the possibility of building new nuclear plants in the United States. The Nuclear Energy Institute formed in September 2000 an industry New Nuclear Power Plant Task Force to identify the market conditions and business structures that will lead to the construction of new nuclear power plants in the United States. Business entities making the decisions to build new nuclear plants will need reasonably good estimates of costs and schedules. While many cost and schedule factors are project specific, other factors are external, and the task force has focused on these.



NEI's Integrated Plan for New Nuclear Plants and related task forces. In 2001, the New Nuclear Power Plant Task Force completed a plan to facilitate new plant business decisions. The Integrated Plan for New Nuclear Plants encompasses four broad areas of activity.

● New plant economics and project structure concentrates on enhancing the economics of new nuclear plants through energy policy initiatives, innovative project and ownership structures, improved capital cost and schedule estimates, and modernizing NRC financial-related requirements.

● Predictable licensing and stable regulation targets reducing time-to-market for new nuclear plants by ensuring well-understood processes are in place for predictable and efficient licensing, construction, start-up and operation of new plants.

● Policymaker and public support considers communicating the energy-security, environmental, and economic benefits of nuclear energy to policy makers and opinion leaders as well as the general public.

● Nuclear industry infrastructure aims to ensure a qualified work force to design, construct, operate, and maintain new plants as well as sufficient manufacturing capability, engineering services, and equipment suppliers for new nuclear plants. NEI is coordinating industry task forces to analyze and take action on the many issues in each of these areas.

[IQ]

Government Programs Supporting the Building of New Nuclear Plants

U.S. national energy policy supports the expansion of nuclear energy. In August 2005, President George W. Bush signed into law The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (H.R. 6). The legislation had bipartisan support—the U.S. House of Representatives voted in favor by a margin of 275 to 156, and the U.S. Senate 74 to 26. The Energy Policy Act includes a wide range of measures supporting construction of new nuclear plants as well as operating plants. It provides incentives for building new reactors, including loan guarantees, production tax credits, and investment protection for delays beyond the builder's control. It also bolsters nuclear energy research and development. When signing the bill, President Bush said, “Nuclear power is another of America's most important sources of electricity. Of all our nation's energy sources, only nuclear power plants can generate massive amounts of electricity without emitting an ounce of air pollution or greenhouse gases. And thanks to the advances in science and technology, nuclear plants are far safer than ever before. Yet America has not ordered a nuclear plant since the 1970s....With the practical steps in this bill, America is moving closer to a vital national goal. We will start building nuclear power plants again by the end of this decade.” For details, see the NEI fact sheet, Highlights of Nuclear Energy Provisions in Comprehensive Energy Legislation (H.R. 6).



DOE launches Nuclear Power 2010, “a public private partnership on clean, affordable energy.” DOE is implementing national energy policy concerning nuclear energy as part of the Nuclear Energy 2010 program launched in 2002. In this program aimed at building a new nuclear plant in the United States by 2010, DOE is partnering with the private sector to explore both federal and private sites that could host new nuclear plants; to demonstrate the efficiency and timeliness of key NRC licensing processes designed to make licensing of new plants more efficient and effective; and to conduct research needed to make the safest and most efficient nuclear plant technologies available.



DOE begins joint government-industry projects with three nuclear energy companies applying for early site permits to build new nuclear plants. DOE has partnered with Dominion Resources, Entergy, and Exelon to submit applications to the NRC for early site permits that would enable these companies to locate new nuclear reactors at current nuclear plant sites—the North Anna power station site in Virginia, the Clinton site in Illinois, and Grand Gulf in Mississippi. DOE is sharing the cost of first-time demonstration of the new permitting process, with each company providing at least 50 percent of the funding. The permitting process enables companies to complete the site evaluation element of the procedure to license a new nuclear plant before the decision is made to build it. The new process allows for public participation early, in both siting and design. The permit is valid for up to 20 years and is used, along with an NRC design certification for the type of plant to be built, to file for a combined construction and operating license (COL), the final regulatory step for new plant construction.



DOE offers grants to the industry to test the NRC combined construction and operating license regulatory process. In early 2004, three consortia responded to DOE’s solicitation under the Nuclear Power 2010 initiative and were awarded matching funds. Two will test the construction and operating license process and a third consortium will develop a feasibility study for a site.



DOE awards cost-sharing grants to nuclear energy companies to explore potential sites for new nuclear plants. In 2002, DOE funded cooperative projects with Dominion Resources and Exelon to conduct scoping studies analyzing the suitability of both private and federal sites as potential locations for new nuclear power plants. These studies will exercise the NRC process for evaluating sites owned by utilities and sites on DOE facilities at the Savannah River site, the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, and the Portsmouth site in Ohio. In addition, in 2004, DOE awarded the TVA-led COL consortium a matching grant to fund a study on the costs of building a two-unit ABWR on TVA’s Bellefonte site in Alabama.



DOE identifies future reactor designs that could be ordered by 2010 in the United States. DOE’s Near-Term Deployment Group was formed in 2001 to address the regulatory, technical, and institutional issues required to support the commercial use of new nuclear plants in the United States by 2010. In 2003, the Group, through DOE's Energy Information Administration, issued the report, New Reactor Designs, providing information on nuclear reactor designs that are either available to be built in the United States or expected to be available by 2030. Included are certified designs, those in various stages of certification, those anticipated for certification, and those in the conceptual stage (Generation IV reactors)—advanced pressurized water reactors and boiling water reactors, pressurized heavy water reactors, and high-temperature gas-cooled reactors, 12 in all.



DOE designates the Idaho National Laboratory as the nation’s nuclear technology center to manage the Nuclear Power 2010 and Generation IV programs. Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham in 2002 named the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) as America’s leading facility for nuclear energy research and development, “the epicenter of our efforts to expand nuclear energy as a reliable, affordable and clean energy source for our nation’s energy future. This realignment is an important first step to rebuilding our advanced nuclear research capabilities.” In addition to supporting Nuclear Power 2010 and the Generation IV reactor initiatives, INL will investigate advanced fuel cycle and transmutation technologies, continue its role in building DOE’s national used nuclear fuel repository, and conduct programs for the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Over the past 50 years, INL has designed, constructed, and operated more than 50 reactors at the site.



DOE initiates the Next Generation Nuclear Plant project at the Idaho National Laboratory as the cornerstone of a hydrogen economy. In 2004, Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham launched the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) project to develop “an advanced nuclear energy system that will produce both inexpensive electric power and large quantities of cost-effective hydrogen to support the development of a clean and efficient hydrogen economy.” Sec. Abraham characterized NGNP as “a major leap in technology, smaller, safer, more flexible, and more cost-effective than any commercial nuclear plant in history.” He said that research and development on the new reactor will be conducted at INL, creating a “clean energy future where we will reduce the nation’s dependency on foreign sources of energy and demonstrate clearly that we can have both strong economic growth and a strong commitment to the environment.”



DOE specifies the technical concept of the Next Generation Nuclear Plant. William Magwood, director of DOE’s Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology, said in 2004 that “The NGNP would be able to make both electricity and hydrogen at very high levels of efficiency; would be deployable in modules that will better fit the highly competitive, deregulated market environment in the United States; and would be extraordinarily safe, proliferation-resistant, and waste-minimizing. The base concept is that of a very-high-temperature gas-cooled reactor system, coupled with an advanced, high-efficiency turbine generator and even more advanced thermochemical hydrogen production system.”



DOE launches the Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems Initiative to fulfill a congressional mandate. The U.S. Congress provided funds for the Department of Energy to develop a road map for the use of next-generation (conceptual stage “Generation IV”) nuclear power plants. Toward this end, the Generation IV International Forum (GIF) formed in 2001 and consists of Argentina, Brazil, Canada, France, Japan, Republic of Korea, Republic of South Africa, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States. In 2006, the European Commission approved the European Atomic Energy Community's (EURATOM) participation to represent EU countries that are not individual parties to the agreement. The international forum coordinates governments, industry, and the research community worldwide to determine the research and development required to bring Gen IV technologies to the commercial marketplace by 2030 or earlier. The group’s functions are to (1) identify potential areas of multilateral collaboration and research on Gen IV reactors and (2) provide guidelines for conducting, reviewing, and reporting the results of collaborative research and development projects.



Generation IV International Forum produces Gen IV roadmap for advanced reactor development and deployment. GIF produced a Generation IV Roadmap in September 2002 that identified R&D activities, sequencing of tasks, initial cost estimates, and opportunities for national and international cooperation. GIF’s Overview of Generation IV Technology Roadmap presents six Gen IV systems: gas-cooled fast reactor, lead-cooled fast reactor, molten salt reactor, sodium-cooled fast reactor, supercritical-water-cooled reactor, and very-high-temperature reactor.

[IQ]

International New Plant Construction and Business Arrangements

Current nuclear plant building outside of the United States. In 12 countries, 30 new nuclear plants are under construction. A number of these plants use U.S. designs approved by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for construction in the United States. With eight units already based on the ABB Combustion Engineering System 80 design in operation or under construction, in 1997 the Republic of Korea selected the ABB CE System 80+ (now a part of Westinghouse) as the technology base for the advanced Korean Next Generation Reactor. Also, Japan recently completed construction of two plants using the General Electric advanced boiling water reactor (ABWR) design.

United States begins Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems Initiative. The U.S. Department of Energy began an international project in 2000 involving nine other countries to determine the research and development required to bring Gen IV reactor technologies to the commercial marketplace by 2030 or earlier. In September 2002 the Generation IV International Forum produced a roadmap for plant deployment with sequencing of tasks and cost estimates.

United States and France agree to cooperate on future nuclear technology development. In September 2000, the heads of the U.S. Department of Energy and the French Commissariat de l'Energie Atomique signed an agreement to share facilities and resources to develop advanced reactor technology and used nuclear fuel accelerator transmutation. The agreement involves joint planning for the use of existing R&D resources and a common research program to develop fuel and materials for next generation advanced reactors. The agreement also includes cooperation of medical and industrial applications of isotopes.

United States and France extend cooperation on future nuclear technologies. In August 2004, the heads of the U.S. Department of Energy and the French Commissariat de l'Energie Atomique signed an agreement to foster increased cooperation in nuclear research and development between the two countries. Besides nuclear fuel and fuel development projects, the agreement will give DOE access to CEA's PHENIX fast-spectrum reactor. The agencies will work together on an experimental irradiation project to test various types of fuel loaded with minor actinides--highly toxic, long-lasting material found in used nuclear fuel. The project will identify the best-performing fuel for future use in high-level waste transmuting systems.

The United States and the European Union agree to share energy research facilities. In May 2001 the United States and the European Union signed agreements to develop joint standards, share research and development facilities, and exchange experts in the fields of nuclear and non-nuclear energy. They will collaborate in fossil energies and coping with climate change, in new energy sources such as hydrogen and solar energy, and in energy efficiency. The aim of the agreements is to make it easier for researchers to participate in each others' programs and share information systematically.

Eskom South Africa, BNFL, and Exelon form a partnership to develop the pebble-bed modular reactor. Eskom, BNFL, and Exelon (temporarily), along with the Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa, formed a partnership in 2000 to develop the pebble-bed modular reactor (PBMR). The partnership anticipates that these reactors will be built in South Africa and the United States for commercial power generation around 2010. In 2004, the South African government approved the PBMR demonstration project and decided to invest in it. Also in 2004, PBMR Ltd. informed the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission that it would submit an application for design certification in 2007.

International Reactor Innovative and Secure (IRIS) project. Westinghouse formed an international consortium of vendors, energy companies, and universities in 1999 to develop the International Reactor Innovative & Secure (IRIS) reactor for deployment by 2015 at the latest. The countries involved are Brazil, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

Hitachi, Toshiba, and General Electric agree to jointly develop a new type of nuclear reactor. In October 2000, Hitachi, Toshiba, and General Electric agreed to coordinate their technological expertise in designing a new type of advanced boiling-water reactor with more efficient turbines. They will exchange design data on the Internet and eliminate duplication in the design process, reducing development cost by half. In addition, by using similar materials, they expect to cut construction costs in half. They expect that the low cost reactor will be attractive to power companies in Japan and Asia. The project will begin at the end of 2001 with deployment expected by 2015.

The International Program for General Atomics' Gas Turbine Modular Helium Reactor (GT-MHR). The GT-MHR International Program for the Generation IV reactor developed by General Atomics is sponsored jointly by the U.S. Department of Energy and the Russian Federation's Minatom agency and supported by Framatome of France and Fuji Electric of Japan. The design and development phase is scheduled to be completed by 2004, a prototype reactor built and operating at full power by 2010 at Tomsk, Russia, and a four-module plant operating by 2015.

Electricite de France moves toward Evolutionary Pressurized Water Reactor (EPR) development. In July 2004, the Board of Directors of Electricite de France authorized beginning development of the Framatome-designed Evolutionary Pressurized Water Reactor, starting with site selection. The EPR is a 1,600 megawatt PWR designed to serve as a demonstration project for the next generation of EDF's nuclear plants that will begin to replace the current fleet in 2015. Construction would take approximately 57 months. In June 2004, France's National Assembly had passed draft energy policy designed to preserve the nations' current fleet of reactors, and support construction of new reactors based on the EPR design. France has 59 operating nuclear power plants that provide 79 percent of the nation's electricity.

[IQ]

Designing and Building a New Generation of Nuclear Power Plant

Industry-wide coordination begins on the nuclear plant of the future. In the mid-1980s, industry leaders recognized that U.S. and world energy demand for baseload electricity generation would continue to grow. Believing that emission-free, economical nuclear energy should be part of the solution, they began to prepare for the time when new nuclear plants would be needed in the United States and around the world.

Comprehensive, high-level nuclear industry participation. Energy companies and nuclear plant design and construction firms as well as such industry organizations as EPRI, Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO), and NEI formed the Nuclear Power Oversight Committee to work on this project. Representation on the executive committee was at the CEO level.

The objective—pre-approved, ready-to-build advanced nuclear plant designs for the future. The Committee’s objective was to develop a group of advanced nuclear power plant designs, obtain design approval from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, complete standardized engineering for the designs, and provide reliable estimates for construction costs and schedules. This objective was achieved when standardized engineering was completed and the last design received NRC certification in 2000.

The approach—improvement and standardization. The Committee recognized a need to build new nuclear plants in a fundamentally improved way—with improved, standardized designs, based on owner-operator requirements and 40 years of U.S. plant operating experience, improved plant performance, and a predictable NRC licensing process.

Strategic plan guides efforts. The industry began codifying its progress in the U.S. Nuclear Industry’s Strategic Plan for Building New Nuclear Power Plants. The first edition appeared in 1990 and the last in 1998, when it was clear that the work of the Committee was about to be accomplished. "This strategic plan has accomplished much of what it set out to do and has helped the industry maintain its focus throughout a number of unexpected challenges."

[IQ]

Today's Nuclear Power Plants: Safe, Durable, Customized Designs

Light water reactors are used the most throughout the world. The light water reactor, so called because its coolant is ordinary water, is the work-horse of the nuclear energy industry in the United States and overseas. There are two types: pressurized water reactors (PWRs) and boiling water reactors (BWRs). Nearly two-thirds of the world’s nuclear power plants are PWRs.

The difference between light water and heavy water reactors. Heavy water reactors use heavy water (two atoms of deuterium and one atom of oxygen) as a moderator. Because heavy water is a more efficient moderator, heavy water reactors can use natural uranium (0.7% U-235) as a fuel. Thus, fuel for heavy water reactors is cheaper, but the water is more expensive. Also, heavy water reactors can be refueled while they are operating. Light water reactors, on the other hand, use enriched uranium (2-5% U-235), ordinary water, and must be shut down for refueling. The CANDU reactors of Canada use the heavy-water design.

Many lessons learned from today’s light water reactors. The U.S. nuclear industry has learned many important lessons from the construction and operation of today’s nuclear power plants: how to improve safety, economics, construction management and practices, operation and maintenance.

The importance of design standardization. One of the most important lessons learned is that customized designs can create inefficiencies, duplication of effort, and high costs. This realization brought about a fundamental change in industry practice: design standardization. Most of America’s operating nuclear power plants are virtually one-of-a-kind, because they were designed and built at a time when regulatory requirements, licensing standards and the technology were evolving rapidly.

[IQ]

Tomorrow's Nuclear Power Plants: Safer, More Economical, and Efficient Standardized Designs

U.S. commitment to standardized nuclear plant designs. For future plants, the U.S. electric power industry is firmly committed to using standardized designs. Standardization means simply that units will be built in families of the same design, except for a limited number of site-specific differences.

Advantages of standardization. The new designs will incorporate the latest technologies, and will be easier to operate and faster to build. These plants will achieve even higher safety goals than today’s plants. Standardization will reduce construction and operating costs, and lead to greater efficiencies and simplicity in all aspects of nuclear plant operations, including safety, maintenance, training, and spare parts procurement.

France demonstrates the benefits of standardized designs. The French nuclear program is based on standardized nuclear plant designs. Over nearly two decades, the French built 34 standardized 900-megawatt units and 20 1,300-megawatt units, which now supply about 79 percent of that country’s electricity. By using standardized designs, the French were able to cut construction times significantly. The first units in the 900-megawatt series took about seven years to build; the last units, only five years. Because of standardization, the cost of nuclear power plants in France is among the lowest in the world.

Korea demonstrates the benefits of standardized designs. The Republic of Korea’s nuclear energy program, with eight units referencing the System 80 plant design, is another example of the benefits of standardization. Built in two-unit series, each successive project has experienced reduced construction and start-up schedules. Further reductions are expected in four units under construction.

Three standardized designs approved by the NRC for the United States. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved three standardized nuclear plant designs, now available for new plant orders. Two are large 1,350-megawatt "evolutionary" designs, and one is a smaller 600-megawatt design that uses "passive" safety features. The passive design employs conventional reactor and power generation technology, but uses passive features such as stored water and gravity for safety functions as opposed to systems that use pumps and motors to move the water.